Welcome everyone to the inTEST Corporation’s 2014 Third Quarter Financial Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded today and a replay will be accessible at www.intest.com. I would now like to turn the call over to Laura Guerrant, inTEST’s Investor Relations consultant. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Aaron and thank you for joining us for inTEST’s 2014 third quarter financial results conference call. With us today are Robert Matthiessen, President and CEO; Hugh Regan, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer; Jim Pelrin, Vice President and General Manager of inTEST’s Thermal Products segment; and Dan Graham, Senior Vice President and General Manager of inTEST’s Electrical and Mechanical Products segment. Mr. Matthiessen will briefly review highlights from the third quarter, as well as current business trends. Mr. Regan will then review inTEST’s detailed financial results and discuss guidance for the fourth quarter of 2014. We’ll then have time for any questions. If you have not yet received a copy of today’s release, a copy may be obtained on inTEST’s website www.intest.com. Before we begin the formal remarks, the company’s attorneys advise that this conference call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements do not convey historical information but relate to predicted or potential future events that are based upon management’s current expectations. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, changes in business conditions in the economy, changes in the demand for semiconductors, changes in the rates of and timing of capital expenditures by semiconductor manufacturers, progress of product development programs, increases in raw material and fabrication costs associated with our products and other risk factors set forth from time-to-time in the company’s SEC filings including, but not limited to, inTEST’s periodic reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q. The company undertakes no obligation to update the information on today’s conference call to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events. And with that, let me now turn the call over to Robert Matthiessen. Please go ahead, Bob.

Thanks Laura. Welcome everyone to our 2014 third quarter conference call. Well Hugh will review the financial results in detail; I will review some of the highlights and will then discuss our markets with what we are seeing in our customer base. Results for the third quarter were within guidance and the decline reflects the industry’s normal seasonal patterns. Q3 bookings were $10.6 million compared with second quarter 2014 bookings of $12.6 million. And net revenues for the third quarter were $10.8 million compared with second quarter net revenues of $12.3 million. The steady growth in the electronics industry is boosting semiconductor manufacturing well innovations in semiconductor devices and the growing complexity of silicon chips is driving demand for the ATE industry. For inTEST, we continue to see a good year for 2014, in fact better than 2013. On a year-to-date basis, bookings and revenue are up 15% and 6% respectively, compared with the same period last year fueled by the momentum and strength of our business as well as the demand and adoption of our new products from a wide range of customers. Our thermal non-semiconductor related business again increased in both absolute dollars and as a percentage of revenues. For the third quarter, 38% of bookings and 34% of net revenues were derived from non-semi test, an increase of 11% and 27% respectively over Q2 2014. Recall that at the end of the quarter, last year we revised the non-semi related historical bookings and revenue figures to include service which had previously not been included. inTEST Corporation has demonstrated that during periods of cyclicality of cyclically declining revenues, the company is structured such that we can remain profitable. And for the third quarter, we reported our 20th consecutive quarter of profitability, a metric we are very proud of.…

Thanks Bob. Third quarter 2014 and user net revenues were $9.9 million or 92% of net revenues compared with second quarter of 2014 end user net revenues of $11.3 million. OEM net revenues were essentially flat coming in at $894,000 or 8% of net revenues down from $1 million or 8% for the second quarter of 2014. As noted earlier, net revenues from markets outside of semiconductor test were $3.6 million or 34% of net revenues compared with $2.9 million or 23% of net revenues in the second quarter. The company’s gross margin for the third quarter was $5.2 million or 48% as compared with $6.1 million or 49% in the second quarter. The reduction in the gross margin was the result of an increase in our fixed manufacturing costs, as a percentage of our net revenues, which increased from 12% of the second quarter net revenues to 14% of third quarter net revenues. While these costs increased as a percentage of net revenues sequentially they actually decline 71,000 or 5% sequentially due to lower facility costs in the third quarter compared to the second quarter. Our consolidated component material costs remained flat at 35.4% for both the second and third quarters. Our thermal and electrical product segments both experienced decreases in their component material cost during the third quarter. Our thermal product segments component material cost decreased from 30.5% in Q2 to 28.3% in Q3 while our electrical product segment saw its component material cost to decline from 37.6% in Q2 to 37.3% in Q3. The decrease in the component material costs in both segments was driven by changes in both product and customer mix. Our mechanical product segments component material costs increased from 41.6% in Q2 to 47.5% in Q3 due to changes in product mix. I will…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] And we’ll go first to Les Sulewski with Sidoti & Company. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Good evening guys. How are you?

Hi Les.

Hey Les. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Can you provide us with an update of how the off-shoring of manipulators went and just overall to transfer on that?

I’ll take you right to the horse’s mouth, I have Dan Graham here and he runs that division. Dan?

Yes Les that is going a little bit slower than anticipated. We are being very careful in assessing the number one candidate at the moment and we’re pulling back and forth with some very detailed questioning. Having said that, we have increased somewhat the number of parts we are having made in China. We’ve been using a vendor in China for some time for many of our smaller machines and parts, particularly the complex ones. And that works very well for those smaller parts, but not for the large ones like the manipulators. So, we are pressing ahead, we fully intend to complete that and we certainly have not forgotten about it.

And Les, this is Hugh Regan. I would expect now that we will probably be making further comments, but the timeline has been pushed back by at least six months on this. So, I would anticipate probably sometime in the second quarter of 2015, we would have something more definitive. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Okay. Can you talk a little bit about – you mentioned multiple new product lines coming out. What’s been most successful to-date, where are you seeing the most interest and perhaps maybe – if you can break it down by each segment as well, that would be helpful?

In the – well Dan you want to talk about your segment?

Yes. In the two segments that I operate with, we have a new fully automated dock or heavy automated dock using nomadics and all sorts of electric sensors, that’s basically a push button operation. That’s a bit more expensive, so it’s better margins. And we do have some customers who are willing to pay for that. We do – we have just shipped our first units of that dock to a major IDM, as Bob mentioned in his remarks. And it’s been very successfully tested and they’re very happy with it so far. In the electrical segment, we have developed an interface for the Flex family of Teradyne testers, which is a major family, there are three different testers in various configurations and we started shipping those in the last three or four months and they’ve also been very well received by multiple customers.

Okay. In the thermal business we have a lot of products; I’ll let Jim comment on them.

Yes, in the thermal business particularly the Sigma Systems products. We shipped quite a few new products many times to each customer represents a new product, they’re not necessarily high volume and repeat products, but we do that on a very consistent basis. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Thank you that is helpful. Moving on what’s thermal as well, I think you mentioned in the previous call that you’re expecting a pickup in the thermal business for the second half just according to – it was about 5.9 in revenue this quarter, I mean what can we expect in the fourth quarter just kind of realize your expectations?

Well, we’re actually and do you know Les, we provided guidance on revenue for the company. We don’t break our revenue guidance down by operating segment. Well the thermal segment did have a slight decline in sales between Q2 and Q3. The important metrics for them was the increase in bookings of 7%, which would indicate typically that you would see a trend up in fourth quarter revenues there. As we’ve discussed publicly in calls as well as in our filings not all of our segments operate sort of on the same cycle. So thermal tends to be – their semiconductor demand also tends to be slightly different than ours, but clearly their demand from markets outside of semi is on a totally different schedule or cycle than the semi markets. And while we have limited market share there, they’ve had some recent successes that would – that have clearly show in the increasing bookings in that space, which were up roughly 12% quarter-over-quarter to 38% of our bookings. So, I think we clearly expect continued growth in those verticals outside of semi. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Fair enough. And are you seeing any new competition coming into thermal side?

Not really, we are the guys that are coming in lot of these areas. And so you’d have to talk to the guys that used to supply what we’re getting now. So, we’re the aggressors right now.

As we’ve said Les, our solutions are semi-custom solutions are displacing off the shelf products created by several vendors. So, in essence we’ve not seen anyone yet trying to do what we do on a semi-custom basis. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: And you know, perhaps one last one from me, maybe a quick update on the acquisition front?

Well, all we can say is, I remind everyone is that we continue to be very focused in this area. But, beyond that the lawyers remind me all the time that I really can’t say more than that. So, we are continued to focus and hope to have something to talk about in our future conference call. Les Sulewski – Sidoti & Company: Fair enough. Thank you for the additional color.

You’re welcome.

And we’ll go next to Srini Sundararajan with Summit Research. Srini Sundararajan – Summit Research: Hi, looking towards next year, where do you think the major inflections might be in terms of driving your revenue ahead?

Srini, its Hugh. I would say it will be in the thermal area that we hope to continue growing business in those verticals. We do expect our semi business to be up in 2015 compared to 2014 at least level with that and to be honest with you, we’re optimistic that we will see growth in all three segments in the semi area. And then clearly we’re focused on growth for acquisition as well, I said I couldn’t comment on when we expect to have a deal done. We are very focused in and we’d hope that we would have something to do in the next 12 months. Srini Sundararajan – Summit Research: Sure. And my next question is on regarding the acquisition, are you trying to – to what segment would it likely be directed towards and what kind of accretion profile do you want for the acquisition?

As far as the segment, we’ve said publicly that we’re focused on opportunities that are thermally oriented technologies. Srini Sundararajan – Summit Research: Sure.

So, I would expect that our acquisition will have something to do with thermally oriented technologies, although I will add that we do look at some opportunities that are not thermally oriented and there is always the possibility that we could move forward or execute on one of those as well. I think the common focus is that on all the opportunities we are looking at serve verticals outside of semi and that’s clearly follows our diversification strategy. As far as accretion, the company’s desire is to have a deal that would be accretive from the day we would close the transaction ex, the first quarter in which we would have deal closing costs, but that the deal would be immediately accretive. Srini Sundararajan – Summit Research: Okay, thank you.

You’re welcome.

And that does conclude our question-and-answer session. At this time, I’d like to turn the call back over to Mr. Matthiessen for any comments and closing remarks.

Well thank you for your interest in inTEST. We look forward to updating you on our progress when we report our fourth quarter and 2014 year-end results in January. Good evening.

And that does conclude today’s conference. We thank you all for your participation.